> > I wonder if we could be even more granular
> > for the "normal autovacuum" case and point to the reason the table was
> > chosen. For example, was it the insert threshold, the update/delete
> > threshold, etc.?
>
> Sounds like reasonable information. I guess we might want to have such
> information in a cumulative statistics view but do you think it's
> better to have it in a dynamic statistics view?
+1 for this information in cumulative stats, on a per table level for sure.
I do think however the pg_stat_all_tables views is getting too wide
and moving new relation vacuum stats to a separate stats view will
be very useful.
--
Sami